Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded✔ FIXED

prendrefeu- with the possibility of TRC coming, I think that many potential sponsors are scared from the fallout and rightfully so. In the long haul TRC is both necessary and beneficial, but it doesn't help pro cycling in the short run.

I'm not sure it is getting too expensive to sponsor (maybe it is, maybe it isn't), but lets assume that is the case. Just means that riders salaries would have to decrease as a whole (not getting paid much compared to other top sports) and maybe just cut out some of the smaller races?

_________________"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

I wouldn't say top level cycling is too expensive to sponsor, it's just getting too expensive at the current time. Taking premiership football for an example, American football or baseball could quite easily be substituted, sports that have a far higher outlay for players continue to thrive. It's not the sponsorship that brings in the money to my knowledge, rather the TV rights. For cycling to have the same level of payout each year from the likes of SKY or Eurosport here, there has to be a larger perceived audience. There currently is that audience of mindless people who will happily sit and watch 90 minutes of men running up and down a field. The audience for cycling is considerably smaller. It's there for the big events, the British winners of the Tour de France here, or maybe even the Worlds, but the rest does not offer the same potential to advertisers.

I just don't think cycling will ever get the attention that football/NBA/NFL/MLB receive (sponsor wise nor TV contracts). We (cycling fans) are a very small minority. I think we will always tend to be that way. I'm ok with that.

_________________"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

TV Revenue sharing will be very helpful as a whole for the teams, the money is currently going to the networks and nothing is coming back to the teams in comparison to the profits actually being made.

Overall, in addition to sponsorship costs, the poor relationships between race organizers, sponsors, Riders, Team Bosses, and the UCI/National agencies doesn't work to better the sport. I believe having strong players/riders unions helps both riders and the teams/sponsors. Instead of teams folding, sponsors would have to honor their agreements for the length of their commitment and less guys would be left out in the cold.

American Pro sports aren't the best examples for sure, some of the CBAs and player unions have helped the overall expansion of the sports.

Do you guys think a ProTour cycling TV channel that is online based would work? Something like UFC.tv or espn3.com. Probably not enough interest or information to do a 24/7 cycling channel, but at least have a station directly responsible for covering the races? But that would then leave out the national media chains from getting a piece of the pie, so that might not work with politics and all.

_________________"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

First of all there are a high number of teams which do not operate on the real market.Katyusha, Astana, BMC, Sky.Saxo and Omaga Pharma, Lampre also do not sponsor cycling for ROI.

I think BSkyB would argue that they do get the ROI. They are spending less than 1% of their advertising budget and getting massive exposure not just through Team Sky but their other investments in cycling in the UK.

_________________"Step forward the climber and all those who worship at the altar of lightness" - R. Millar

>Do you guys think a ProTour cycling TV channel that is online based would work?cycling.tv ?But I would not want to miss out on Sporza's coverage of the classics, for example, others would miss RAI's coverage of the Italian races.Perhaps some would even miss the "voice of cycling" .

I do think the TV coverage and subsequent money coming in will help, but the one thing that makes cycling so great, is also one revenue generating line for most other sports, and that is gate ticket cost. All the sports we try to compare cycling to have this. Have you priced a "Big Game/Super Bowl" Ticket lately? Formula 1, Moto GP, they all have ticket cost associated with each event, they are not riding out in the middle of nowhere and then finishing in a town, they are doing lap after lap of a designated list of tracks. Maybe we should just do that, race on the same tracks as the F1 or Moto Gp races are held on, You could do multiple laps and they are set up to catch almost the entire track on camera.

HUMP

_________________Why are the best things in life always the ones you start last?

In that aspect, yes it is cheaper compared to an NFL team or a Premier league soccer event, but it is the TV coverage on a large brand network that gets the money and pays the bills. In Europe I can see this, in the US, the fan base is so small compared to the other sports, that the TV time is not there. Think about the last time you saw cycling on a big network channel and I don't mean Universal Sports, I am talking FOX, NBC, CBS and the like.I think the F1 model is a good one to start with and build from there.

_________________Why are the best things in life always the ones you start last?

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum